search
top

Left in a Panic?

Kurt Schlichter thinks the left is losing control of the narrative. I’m not quite as optimistic. The left has four years to wear us down. Remember that the anti-gun folks didn’t have the votes for an assault weapons ban or magazine ban, until they did. We also really have no idea what the President is planning on doing, or how hard he is planning on pushing. So I’m reluctant to suggest the left is in full retreat. It’s too soon to suggest we’ve beaten back the main push, or even seen it.

19 Responses to “Left in a Panic?”

  1. Patrick H says:

    Yeah until we see what they really will push, I’ll still be on edge.

  2. Harold says:

    Obama knows how to get legislation through a Democratic Congress, at least, and putting Joe Biden in charge of a commission is not that (wasn’t he in charge of something like that for jobs?).

    Did Clinton push really hard for his AWB? Can’t remember right now, and of course it but one ornament in Christmas tree legislation, various legislators argued, often unsuccessfully, that it would put cops on the street etc., right?

    • Sebastian says:

      Clinton pushed for it, and got it attached to his overall crime bill. That made it a lot more difficult to fight.

      • Mike123 says:

        It got out of Senate committee because Sen. Arlen Specter didn’t show up. He had claimed he was against the ban but for someone reason never made it to the committee vote.

  3. Exurbankevin says:

    My concern is that their opening bid will be a ban on new semi-autos and standard capacity mags a la Canada’s gun laws no sunset, and then force us to negotiate from there, leading to another AWB-esque compromise.

    My hope is that things have changed since 1994. Concealed carry is now the norm. AR’s are cheap and plentiful. The primary use for guns is no longer hunting and bullseye, it’s self-defense and practical shooting. Since 1994, “gun culture” has morphed into something ideally suited to fight another AWB.

  4. jkp says:

    Link doesn’t work.

  5. motomed says:

    I both agree with the article and agree that now is not the time to relax. Time to sweep the leg.

  6. Rob says:

    I’m not sure anyone is on the run, and I don’t see any indications that one side has an advantage.

    What I do see, is media doing the same old song and dance all over the place… so much so I stopped tuning in as its just an irritant anymore. And I see anti gun protesting again with a grain of salt with the aforementioned media channels.

    What I don’t see… any Pro Gun rallies. At this point if your a gun owner its put up or shut up time. It doesn’t take much effort to send a letter or email, or even pick up the phone. Everyone talks about compromise… we tried that back in the 80’s and 90’s… look where that got us… no compromise…. period.

    on a lighter note hope everyone at least had a good Xmas.

    Rob

  7. Gilbert Stroud says:

    Whether it’s too soon or not, articles like these are a good thing, as long as it doesn’t lull us into a sense of complacency. Hearing this and processing the argument will surely plant the seeds of doubt in the gun banners. Only the most rabid anti-2nd amendment hater won’t take the time to at least question whether their tactics are currently effective.

    It’s psyops at its best.

  8. Andy B. says:

    I’m reminded of all the evidence cited before the recent election (including a lot of it here) that the Obama Campaign and Democrats in general were dispirited, de-energized, unmotivated, and/or disorganized.

    Never allow your longing for a victory to cause you to see or misinterpret things that may not be there.

  9. Wolfman says:

    To a degree, I see the scattered ravings of thw gun-ban crowd as minor hysteria. I think Wayne and the Boys did a good thing by going com-silent for the ceremonial week; the media types were out looking for a new story by then, so they HAD to comment on it. If it had been the next day, it may not have been more than a sideways sneer in the midst of the grief hijacking that goes on. Now the NRA gets it a better view- the opposition’s rhetoric is the same, but they wind up playing the story head on AND the NRA can lead with a sorrow/respect angle (that being the real one anyway) and deflect any accusations of blood-dancing. That doesn’t excuse us from acting, however. This argument is our to lose, and if there’s one thing conservative politicians (like it or not, the larger part of our political base) are good at, its pissing away a solid lead. So yes, they may be floundering, but we need to stay the course- stay active, stay vocal, and keep working on getting more people to speak up. More than anything, we need to take these discussions out of our echo chamber and further into mainstream society. We have the moral and functional high-ground, but we need to make sure we keep it.

  10. “the left is losing control of the narrative…”

    This is WAY too premature. No Federal legislation has yet been proposed in Congress. Once it is, then the political debate begins in earnest. All that we have seen up to now is preparing the field.

  11. Muddyboots says:

    The left is in a Devil V. Deep Blue Sea situation. They can beat the gun ban drum to distract from the Fiscal Cliff for a little while and then they have to swap. Chances are that BOTH will fail since they will be fought HARD on both fronts and feel good legislation just won’t fly this time if they want to keep their jobs and THAT is the prime directive: Keep Job!

    The whole thing is a result of bipolar statism at it’s best. Yippie.

    Muddyboots

  12. Andy B. says:

    “Chances are that BOTH will fail since they will be fought HARD on both fronts. . .”

    One thing, though: Don’t go only to right-leaning sources for the narrative on who will be blamed for “failure.” Whether a narrative is right or wrong, what will be most important politically is which one is adopted by most of the public.

  13. Zermoid says:

    How is arguing over how much we lose considered “compromising”???

    How about we put repealing some of the existing laws on the table and then talk compromise?

    • Andy B. says:

      One caution: I learned back in 1995 that when some people are gaining a little bit in legislation, they will argue (and apparently believe) that the losses suffered by others either aren’t losses, or aren’t important, or for some other reason are acceptable.

      My case-in-point was that when comprehensive anti-gun legislation offered the carrot of “shall issue” CCW (already enjoyed by all other PA residents) for residents of Philadelphia for the first time, gun owners, activists, and even NRA referral attorneys from the city became vocal advocates or apologists for all of the rest of the package, selling out other people’s rights. At very least the cacophony of argument helped some really bad legislation to get passed.

      Thinking out loud: Watch for something like, say, “National CCW” to be traded off against, say, some limited but permanent gun/magazine bans. I’m not saying it WILL happen, just that it’s withing the spectrum of possibility.

  14. alcade says:

    I would cautiously agree with the article’s author, but I think another high-profile shooting close on the heels of the last one could turn things back around in the anti’s favor.

    Nevertheless, even if (when?) any sort of AWB is defeated, I think it would be wise of the NRA to continue to focus on mental health reform and their security in schools proposals. Of course we know that eventually another school shooting will happen again, and it would be nice to have a program in place that would not only actually help but also be a way to appease the “do something” crowd.

  15. dustydog says:

    The DNC told the anti-gunnies to play dead last year, to avoid arousing NRA members. Obama’s plan was to suppress turnout, to avoid getting conservatives angry enough to vote. His plan worked. All the groups that were told to shut up in 2012 will be loud and proud when the new Congress convenes in 2013.

top